In his career spanning 35 years Tim has made a contribution to more than 250 releases. Songs and albums mixed and produced by Tim Palmer are well known among rock lovers.
It’s does not come as news, that Backstage Secrets are true rock lovers, that’s why we have a lot of questions for Tim on producing a rock album. And to be more practical we choose the album Tim worked on in order to get the illustrations of his experience, to get real life stories, to get his view of what happens inside a big project like this.
The album we’ve chosen is «All That You Can’t Leave Behind» by U2. 12 million copies sold, 7 Grammy Awards, tons of positive critics’ reviews, a place in the Rolling Stone list "The 500 Greatest Albums of All Time». The album gave a start for an 8 month tour and resulted in 113 shows in total.
Good choice, right? Many outstanding people took part in the creation of this record, like Brian Eno, Daniel Lanois, Steve Lillywhite and many others, besides the band themselves. So we are going to talk about the team work, the partnership within such a huge-names company.
Moreover, the album was released back in 2000, so our conversation is going to cover a little bit of the history of sound engineering.
Backstage Secrets: Hello Tim! How did you get the opportunity to work on the U2’s album?
Tim Palmer: Hi! Basically, I met Bono at some Tin Machine shows years ago. But it wasn’t until I’d mixed a song after Michael Hutchence from an excessive died. Bono just happened to be a guest vocalist on and he really liked the mix. I was obviously happy about that. The next song I mixed was for a movie called «The Million Dollar Hotel» and there was one of my favourite songs that I mixed for U2 called «The Ground Beneath Her Feet». That was sent to me over in London and I mixed the song on my own in London and everybody was happy. So then I was given an opportunity to work on the album. So a couple of songs were sent to me in Los Angeles as files, I think it was «Elevation» and «Stuck In A Moment».
I started mixing those songs and adding the things that I thought would improve the song. They liked that I was doing and the direction I was going so they thought it would be simpler for me to carry on in Dublin. It was an amazing opportunity because there were so many people that I admired in the same place. You’d be sitting at dinner next to Daniel Lanois, Brian Eno, Steve Lillywhite, the band, obviously, Mike Hedges, Jimmy Iovine - they were all there. We would sit and discuss the music.
BS: What songs did you mix for the album? Was it difficult?
TP: «Elevation», «Stuck In A Moment» and «New York». I worked on and contributed to a lot of the other songs like «Walk On» or «Beautiful day». I hear the things that I added in there but the way it works within the U2 camp is if you are the last man mixing a song you get the mix credit. Sometimes you inherit some amazing work from a previous mix engineer.
When I mixed «Elevation» there was some really cool filtering that was part of the session because when you finish working on a song you print what you’ve done. So they may actually really like something that you’ve done, maybe just a verse and then somebody else will mix and incorporate part of what you’ve done. It is very collaborative, it’s not the end game.
I mean the mixing for a band like that is just a way to find out what things are working sometimes. It’s not uncommon to mix a song for two weeks and then Bono arrive to listen to the mix and change his mind about the melody right at the last minute, so you have to rethink the whole thing. It’s also not uncommon to mix a song for a couple weeks and then when we have a dinner sometimes
I’d hear music coming from the live studio and I’d say: «Hang on, I think that’s the song I spent two weeks mixing and they’re playing it now», and they’d say: «Oh yeah, they are trying to improve the backing track, they’re going to recut the song».
It pretty hard to have anything finished because they always try to make it better. They are notoriously known to be making changes in mixes and even adding things in mastering. Bono is being known for adding backing vocal while the mastering. It was very unusual, exciting, sometimes frustrating, but ultimately rewarding.
BS: What were your main mixing tools at the beginning of 2000s? What did you use for the album?
TP:I remember clearly that the band decided to start using the RADAR system which was like a competition for ProTools. It was more like to use tape machine but it was actually digitally recorded. For me I brought in my ProTools which I synced up alongside the RADAR, because I was very familiar with ProTools and I wanted to have the creativity the ProTools would give me. But at the same time I didn’t want to mess around with what they had on the RADAR, so I could link the two together and run my stuff. It was very traditional setup: big studio, SSL consoles.
The first mixes for that album that I did took place on my own studio in LA. And when they started to get more involved in ideas that they had themselves it was simpler for me to go in Dublin. So I then took what I’ve done over to Dublin and started working on the album there.
BS: At that time was it fine working on the record from different countries?
TP: Yes, but it was before high-speed Internet. I would sent ADAT tape over FedEx to Dublin. And I would sit and wait nervously to see wether Edge and Bono and the rest of the band liked the direction I take in the song. It was very possible that they could have said: «No, this is not really we are looking for at all». But I was fortunate: they liked it and said: «Let’s carry this on in Dublin».
BS: What size of multitrack was standard for that time? And which track in the album in particular?
TP: The multitrack or recording on the RADAR in some cases was quite minimal. When I started to mix the song «Stuck In A moment», for instance, I was presented just a mono track of drums. It was definitely brave I’d say. They made a commitment to something. I personally wouldn’t have done like that, I’d rather make a commitment and then record some other stuff as well and just hide it, and just have it there if you need it. But they made that commitment. So when I came to mixing, it forced me into being creative as far as thinking: «Okay, I want to make this move more, I want stereo to be wider». So I played stereo shakers to use them very subtly in the verses, I played tambourines in the chorus. Things like that… I added certain other elements to enhance what they’ve done.
Because of the limitations sometimes you can ultimately be more creative, so necessity being the mother of all invention and all that. Sometimes when you have a session that is so huge and elaborate, all you can really do is get through it all and try make it work. But sometimes when you’re given a lot less it forces you to be creative with what you have. I know that for a fact: when I mixed Pearl Jam’s «Ten» album it was basically a live recording, so it in enabled me to have the ability to sort of think: «Okay, I'm gonna have a reverse reverb into the chorus vocal». Something like that, you know it gave me space because it wasn’t so overcrowded. There was space to be creative, space to add ideas with delays, distortion, maybe other little parts here and there, loops and things like that.
BS: How come the drums were a single mono track? was it a mistake or was it done consciously?
TP: No, no. Sometimes Daniel Lanois was very much of the spirit of when he feels he's captured something and something is right, he tends to go with that. And I think they probably have this idea of that song being all about more like an older 60-s recording capturing a vibe, so they went with it. And as I said: there’s nothing wrong with that, I mean that's whatever you want to do. For me I would always record it like that but maybe have some backup and record some other mics and just hide them until the mix. Then you think: «Ahh, I could do with a little bit more of the cymbals» then maybe I'll just bring those back out. That’s what I would do but you know everyone does their own thing.
BS: Bono’s dynamic and motes range is quite wide. Does work with such a vocal demand some special effort or techniques?
TP: There’s a lot of challenges when you mixing a U2 song because, first of all, Bono is one of these performers who is far better off holding a microphone in his hand and just performing in the studio, in the control room. I mean that's fairly well documented, most of the other people that worked with Bono will tell you the same thing. So whatever it takes to get the best performance is ultimately the most important thing. It's the same thing with any singer. If a singer will perform best hiding in a box in the corner then that's what you should. If a singer perform best by being free with a handheld microphone even if the fidelity of the sound maybe slightly less that’s not so important. What's more important is what they're singing and how they sing it and the performance.
That is no point in forcing someone to stand still in front of a very expensive microphone if you gonna get a boring performance.
The challenges with that are obviously that the microphone is not consistent, so sometimes the vocal gets thin, sometimes it gets very boxy. So I would tend to splice it up according to my ear, put on different tracks and treat them all individually and then recompile it as a new piece. When you listen to U2 songs they give you the feeling of a great sound because they are so well performed sometimes. And if you actually get in there and analyze it you realize that maybe it's not quite so hi-fi as you think.
It's not hard working with Bono’s vocal because when he sing something it's very believable. So you’re already winning as a mixing engineer. You're often trying to bring something out of a vocal that might not actually be there, but with his vocal it’s there, the sort of star quality is in there and it’s very believable, it’s very genuine, he’s a great performer. So you're already winning and it’s about just being technical with it and trying to make it sit in the song right: make sure it's compressed right, make sure it sounds nice to the ear…
But the biggest battle you've got with mixing music is having the material strong because you can mix as much as you like but if the material is not strong you never gonna get really very far. And the performance should be great. Those are the two things (material and performance). If you have those things in place then the mixing should just be an enjoyable process.
BS: What about your mixes? When you listen to them, say one year later, after the work is done, do you usually hear things you’d like to change? Or are you often happy with the finished article?
TP: Well I think it’s a combination. Sometimes by stepping away from it you realise that you maybe worrying about stuff that wasn't important and it sounds fine. Other times you can sort of think: «Ahh, I wish that I’ve done this on that». I mean it changes, it’s different every time. But what I do find is that I have a lot of boxes of DATs tapes of overnight mixes, the mix that you take home at the end of the evening to listen to before you are going make the final changes. And some of those final changes would be very much life or death, you think: «Oh my God, this has to be done». And now listening back to them, the overnight mix actually was perfectly fine where it was. But at the times you seem like you know the world would end unless you make these final changes. Now I listen back and I can barely hear the difference. You know we are all very guilty of getting too involved.
BS: Now for a very popular question: when do you know when the mix is finished?
TP: Well it’s different every time with every artist that you work with. I mean, first of all, obviously before you send anything out you have to be pretty sure that you're happy with it yourself. Some artists will write you and say: « Great don't change anything». Other artists can be going on and on about the smallest detail that drives you crazy, but it’s part of the job.
With U2 they have a sort of unwritten agreement: a mix is not finished until everybody likes it - the whole band and the produces. Sometimes you think that the mix is done and everybody seems happy, but then they could go on for three or four days longer sometimes, just trying to find something special that they were looking for.
BS: There is a lot of ambience & space in the album. There also feels like there’s a relationship between the instruments, something unheard but felt. Delays and reverbs seem like a prior part of the songs. Who can we thank for this? Members of the band? Arrangers? Sound-designers? Mixing engineers?
TP: The band clearly had a vision for how they wanted that record to be. The band, Brian and Daniel, there's no doubt about it they were aiming to something. As far as individual reverbs, ambiences and things like that, they come from various sources.
I sat in the studio with Brian Eno while he dialed in some drum treatments, delays and things. So in that case - it’s Brian. In other songs it could be the Edge’s guitar delay, it could be a reverb that I put on the snare, it could something Steve Lillywhite did to the vocal. It’s such a collaboration.
There’s no one answer to this question really. I know for sure that in «Beautiful Day», for instance, even though I didn’t mix it, I took a sample of Edge’s guitar harmonics, and I treated it within ProTools and I looped it and I sort of created a part that would come in half way through the verses. It’s very subtle but I hear it clearly on the on the final mix and it just becomes part of the ambience of the whole thing.
So there’s no one person or anything, it’s definitely a collaborative effort between the mixing, the song writing and the recording.
BS: How do you remember all these things? It’s almost 20 years since that work. Was it special case or do you remember everything you’ve done?
TP: Well I don’t remember everything. But it was a very important album to me so I guess that’s why it got imprinted on the brain.
BS: How do you feel the mixing process has changed over years?
TP: One of the things about mixing that changed so dramatically is that originally a producer would mix the record as well. Mixers being separate from the producer came in later. When I first started in the studio the producer would be there for the recording, pre-production and then the engineer would mix the record and the producer would stay with him and they would finish the record together. So it was a one shot deal you know.
And then it started in the 80-s, started to separate the idea of «let’s get somebody fresh» to come in and look at what's recorded and be a specialist in mixing. That all came later. When I first used to work with produces mixing was quite precious in the sense that you've spent hours getting the sounds right and having a vision. So the mixing was merely balancing what you’ve done and making it sound cool as it can.
Nowadays, mixing is a whole different beast. Mixing particularly now is a situation a lot of the times where it’s expected of you to bring more to the table than just balance a song.
Particularly in 2016-2017-s where the budgets are small, the musicians don’t have studios and a lot of the people they work with don't have the experience, so you're supposed to sort of finish the job as such.
You're sort of in a way wearing a produce’s hat and saying while mixing: «I really think that in the verse you should not have that part and I’ll take it out, and I’ll try something else instead for you». That's something really new to mixing really compared to how it was when it first started out.
For me the beginnings of that were even happening on U2 records because you know you have to be brave as a mixing engineer sometimes. And you're taking the chance because by muting something that they’ve done and putting something that you think is better. If the artist you're working with hasn't got the ego to deal with that, you can offend them, and they can say: «You know what, he’s out, we don’t want this guy». So you're taking a bit of a chance by saying: «I've muted these parts and I added something new.» But if you’re not brave you also might not get to where you need to be.
When I worked on, for instance, on the song «The Ground Beneath Her Feet», Bono didn’t like the way the electronic drums were sounding. So I rented a snare drum and cymbals and I played a shuffle beat in the verses, and made a loop out of it. Then brought the electronic drums in and out around that and I just thought: «Well I'll go for it». And luckily for me they really liked it and it became the way the song is. It's always a bit of a chance when you’re mixing. You are playing around with people’s emotions and egos and are you’re just going to do ultimately what you think is right song and hopefully they'll be with you.
BS: How often do artists expect a brave mixing-engineer? Is it okay for them to have another person who is going to promote his own ideas, or do they just want a guy who is going to do what they want?
TP: I think both variants exist. Today I’m working with Larry Klein, he’s an amazing musician himself, he works in a very organic traditional way. When I mix his things I'm certainly not going to be picking up my guitar or keyboard, because that's not what he wants from me. And I know that. By talking to him it’s very clear to me what he’s looking for from me. Unless he asks me I would stay clear of that.
Other artists when you've never met them before that's where it gets dangerous because you don't know whether they want that from you. I generally as a mixing engineer say: «Look, I'm going to give you everything I’ve got creatively. And if you don't like something I’ve done, I can mute it, so you got nothing to lose. If you don't like it. just shut it down. But I'll give it to you anyway and you can see what you think.» For most people that’s actually fine, they are grateful. They are grateful that you're prepared to spend the time.
BS: You’ve worked with artists like U2, Ozzy Osbourne, David Bowie… Did you feel the pressure of their big name? Was it hard to be brave with them?
TP: Obviously, if it’s somebody that you admire since you’re a kid, like when I worked with David Bowie, you're probably a little more careful than if you would be working with someone who you feel is sort of your mate or whatever. You can't let that stand in the way, I mean you're basically serving the song and you're trying to bring out the best that it can be. Any artists would expect you to be honest with them.
When I worked with Robert Plant, for instance, I was way out of my depth as far as understanding about Led Zeppelin. I was a punk rocker who grew up on the clash and I had none of the history that I should have had to be working with Robert Plant but he actually enjoyed the fact that I gave him a fresh perspective to somebody who had not grown up in the 70’s listening to Led Zeppelin. So it works well sometimes and they wouldn't want you in the room if you just going to like everything. That's why they want you to be there because they would hopefully respect your opinion, otherwise why they're employing you.
BS: Why do artists and producers have several engineers mix different songs on an album?
TP: There’s two sides for that. Sometimes an artist will work with different producers and they will bring in a mixing engineer in the end and try to bring the whole thing together and to solidify the sound. So it actually works the other way in that situation. Other times when they work with the same producer, they want to try really bring out the best of each individual flavour, so they'll go to people who they feel specialising in that particular sound.
For instance when I worked with The Cure on the album called «Wild Mood Swings», Robert Smith wanted different mixers because he felt that they were good at certain things. He came to me to mix a particular song which was very orchestrated and very emotional and he felt that I would be right for that song, and then maybe with some of the rocky songs he went to someone else. Sometimes you just look at somebody's career on what they do and you pick the mixer that you feel will fit the song that you’re working on.
BS: Sometimes, according to the stories, nowadays big artists like Lana Del Rey or Beyonce have been known to hire up to three or four different mix engineers because they have large budgets and can choose at the end which version they like best.
TP: That’s the whole different thing. That's in a way U2 are a little bit like that. The were songs on that album that were mixed by myself, by Steve Lillywhite, by Mike Hedges, they might be mixed by more than one person. So they can afford to say: «Okay, well that's good. Let’s think about that, maybe that's good?» So they can sort of build up and learn from this their recordings.
So as you said about someone like Beyonce, why wouldn’t they give it to three or four people? Because they can just see what happens.
Plus, because of the nature of our industry and with the way the finances work, there will be people, and we know there are, who will be happy to mix a song for Beyonce for nothing, because of the opportunity to say: «I mixed a song on the Beyonce’s album». They have studios, now most mixing engineer have their own studios, they’ll mix it for nothing anyway. So they got lots of reasons to try different people.
BS: Do you feel the overall sound of an album is affected if different people mix different tracks on it?
TP: I don't think so because, first of all, people very rarely listen to more than one song in a row by one artist anyway. People create playlists flick from here to here, so I don't think it's really that important anymore. And even if you did mix with different mixing engineers, if you got a good mastering engineer he can align the whole thing together a little bit anyway.
BS: When you mixed your tracks on the album, did you listen to other mixes by other engineers?
TP: Oh yeah, absolutely. It's funny I remember when the album was mastered. At the mastering stage it’s scary because you don't want your track to sound way quieter than the track that was mixed by Daniel Lanois. It is a sort of competition, and I remember Steve Lillywhite saying to me: «Why is «Stuck In A Moment» so much louder than the track before?» and I said: «I didn’t do it, it’s not me». It did seem loud when it came in but that was just luck really.
BS: Was the loudness war in full swing around then?
TP: The loudness war wasn’t really peaking at that time, but it was definitely the beginning of that. I mean people go crazy with it. I never understood it. There’s a volume on your stereo, con your car, on your headphones… Turn it up if you want it louder. Why do people have this idea that: «Oh this song’s quiet»? Just turn it up if you want it louder, keep the dynamics in the music and adjust the volume to what you want to hear. I just don't get, it makes no sense to me.
It was a time in mixing where there were certain mixing engineers who were pretty at the top of the game and they would be known to just destroy and smash the mix before mastering. When I was in competition with these guys I lost because I used to say: «No, I’ll leave that to the mastering engineer. And then an A&R man would be sitting in his office, and play one mix which maybe mine and it might be sort of quiet, and then he puts on the next mix that is three times as loud. And everything seems better when this louder which is rubbish. If you’re going to choose, you have choose at the same level, but that’s why the loudness war exists.
BS: There were several times in our conversation where the word ‘producer’ has been mentioned. What do you think this role entails nowadays?
TP: Well the producer of music really is like the director of a movie. If you have a mixer, a recording engineer, you have an artist and songs, the producer should be there.
Traditionally they were there right from the beginning right to the end. They approve the mixes or maybe they do them themselves, they approve the arrangements, they work with the artist in pre-production, they know the musicians, they help the performances, they approve the way the record is sounding. They basically have the oversight of to how the record should be. And most of the time that’s very much alongside the artist, because in my cases making the artist happy was extremely important.
Nowadays music is being broken into so many subsets. So many times at the Grammys now I see «Producer of the year» becomes very difficult to decide because maybe they just produced the vocals and then they have another guy doing beats and then they have another guy recording the actual tracks. So who is exactly the producer? There’s so many shared credits, it's getting harder and harder do define. In rap or r’n’b sometimes there’s five or six producers on a song.
The word is definitely being diluted down. But in the traditional sense that's what the producer did: he oversaw the whole record from beginning to end. He was the liaison between the label and the artist. He would listen to the artists, he would understand what the label we're looking for, he would have his own vision and he would sit there in the middle of them help the artist and make sure the label were given a great record.
BS: And in the case of the U2 album there were two producers: Brian Eno and Daniel Lanois, right?
TP: Those were the main produces but then of course the band. U2 have a very strong input on to how the record sound. They know what they want, so they are producers really as much as Brian and Daniel are. And then, of course, when they’re working with Jimmy Iovine or Steve Lillywhite, they would listen to everyone that's why it takes so long to get it right, because they care about what people think and they also have very strong opinions on how they want it to sound.
BS: What about people from the labels? Who from the labels is responsible for checking mixes or do they not really get involved in that side of things?
TP: They had a relationship with Jimmy Iovine who is a label guy and he’s also a record producer. They're not the sort of band that are going to be told what to do by people or label. Unless that person is someone that they deeply respect.
The reason that U2 have so much longevity is they are very open minded people. They listen to music all the time they love music, they haven’t got huge egos.
Some of the decisions on things that I did in the mixes I thought were brave, but they were just fine with that. I would do things like just take all the drums out for a section and then add whispers of people, and mute bass tracks and things like that. There was never any ego: «Oh, don’t you do that to my stuff». It was absolutely fine, they were creative, very open-minded so made a fun project to work on.
BS: When you are asked to re-mix the song, constantly correct and change things… How do you avoid a sort of conflict? How do you react to and weigh up the comments?
TP: I’ll give you a good story. When I mixed the song «Elevation» everyone was very happy with it. And then I came back to Los Angeles and I used to check in with my friend Sam who has worked with the band for years. I asked Sam: «Is my mix of «Elevation» still the latest one?», and he said: «Yeah», I called back a couple weeks later: «Have they changed «Elevation» yet?», Tom: «No, still your mix for them is great». And then he calls me and says: «Bad news. Bono wants to redo the vocal». I was working on another project and I thought: «That's it, my mix is gone». But what he did was Bono just used the instrumental mix that I did and he sung the new vocal over and they just put the vocal on top of the mix. I can hear it on the record, but at least that meant that it was still my mix essentially, so I still got the mix credit which is great.
BS: In general, did you have a lot of freedom mixing this album or was the band quite strict on what you had to do?
TP: No, I definitely had freedom. But if they didn’t like it, I’d know about it. Nobody’s going to tell you: «No, you can’t do it», but have very strong opinions on what they like, and that’s the way it should be.
BS: When an artist is asked to take part in a track/album production, what is expected from him? Does he have any boundaries, responsibilities? Or full freedom?
TP: Nowadays is people bring a lot of guests in. As a producer I would always try and allow them to show me what they feel they would like to bring as far as the direction of what they want to add and then if I don't like it I’d show them then what I would like to have. There’s no rules, it all depends on who's the boss and who isn’t.
For instance, along time ago when I worked with Robert Plant we brought in Jimmy Page to play guitar solos. I was not going to turn around to Jimmy Page and say: «Right, this is how I want you to play a guitar». I set the guitar sound up and make him as comfortable as he possibly could be, and I let Jimmy do what does and afterwards I recorded as much as I could and then I chose the pieces that I liked and fitted it together with Robert Plant. We sat together and chose the composition of the solos. So, it all depends.
If you’re working with the young artists you might get more direction. If you're working with someone experienced you would probably be wise to let them show you what they feel is right first.
A lot of producing is all about being smart about knowing how to deal with people. Some people need a lot of directions, some people really don’t.
I remember working on the David Bowie’s song once and he sang a vocal on the song and he said: «I need to do it again». I asked him: «Wow, it’s interesting, I thought it was perfect. What didn’t you like about it?» He wanted to make it sadder, so he sang a vocal again and he sang it just a tiny little bit flat. That gave it a sad quality that I’ve never seen another vocalists ever do.
You should respect people to be able to say: «I know this guy knows a lot more about singing than I do, so I’ll let him show me what he wants to do». And than you may like it or not. So, it’s all according to the role, to who you’re dealing with. It changes every time.
BS: The role of Brian Eno and Daniel Lanois in the album. They are mostly known as electronic musicians, but there aren’t many electronic sounds in the album: strings, keys, drum loops… Couldn’t U2 create all these parts by themselves? Or have used their own keyboard player for all these parts? What about electronic parts?
TP: I don’t really what happened with a lot of those parts, I was just presented with songs. Daniel Lanois is a musician that contributes to the music a lot, and Brian Eno is also a master with a lot of keyboards. So I imagine that he played many of those things himself. Brian tends to sort of disappear for a while then come in with a very clear fresh vision. Daniel stays around more day to day or least that's the way it was on the album that I worked on. It changes all the time, there’s no one set rule at all. If Bono had a good idea for a keyboard part he’d probably play it himself.
BS: What is the motivation for wanting some featured artists on the album? After all, isn’t an album something personal, some intimate story? Often we see a couple of tracks with «feat.», or sometimes we see albums, all tracks of which have «feat.» Are there any strategies behind it, or reasons for it?
TP: I think it's different every time. Nowadays a lot of DJs make music but they don’t sing, so they get featured artists to sing for them. Sometimes when you get an artist who's friends with someone they would love to have because they respect other artists, they would love to have them on their album. When I worked with Ozzy he really wanted Paul McCartney to come and play bass, but it didn’t happen. But this is sort of thing that happens.
When I mixed the Michael Hutchence record, as I mentioned earlier, luckily Bono was the guest vocalist on the song because the two of them were friends. That was very fortunate for me because it led to me working with U2. So they were friends and that's why they were both working on music together. It's a combination of different things.
Obviously, nowadays in the pop market a lot of artists bring in somebody like Nicki Minaj because they want her to rap on it. Because it adds another level of stardom and excitement to the song, another level of interest. So that would be financial as well as just a fun.
BS: And connection to the new fan base, especially from different genres and styles.
TP: That’s absolutely true.
BS: Tim, thank you! It was very interesting to talk with you. We hope that this is not the last conversation we have, and if we have more questions for you, we’ll be glad to continue the interview.
Konstantin Korsakov and Anton Rukavishnkov (Backstage Secrets)
Editors: Alina Voliarchuk and Leif Coffield
Share this interview and like our official Facebook page if you want to stay in touch!
!— Facebook Pixel Code —> <!— DO NOT MODIFY —> <!— End Facebook Pixel Code —> <!— webim button generation date: 2016-12-14 version: 8.16.26 —> <!— /webim button —>